Privacy Policy URL

Create a hosted privacy policy URL

create_privacy_policy_url

Idempotent

Generate and host a privacy policy for a business, app, store or site and return its stable HTTPS URL. Free resource types and Agent API key holders get liveUrl at once; other types get a Stripe Checkout link ($49/year) for a human to pay, plus the pendingUrl that goes live after payment. Repeating a call with the same inputs (or the same idempotencyKey) within 24 hours returns the first result.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "companyName": "<companyName>",
      "email": "<email>",
      "resourceType": "<resourceType>"
    },
    "name": "create_privacy_policy_url"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ccpa`	No	Include CCPA/CPRA (California) sections.
`gdpr`	No	Include GDPR (EU/UK) sections.
`coppa`	No	Include COPPA (children under 13) sections.
`email`	Yes	Owner contact email. Receives the live link and manages the URL later.
`caloppa`	No	Include CalOPPA sections.
`companyName`	Yes	Business, app or site name as it should appear in the policy.
`companySlug`	No	URL slug (a-z, 0-9, hyphens). Defaults to a slug of companyName.
`resourceType`	Yes	What the policy covers. See list_resource_types for which are free.
`idempotencyKey`	No	Your own retry key. Defaults to a hash of the other inputs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / email / pattern

Added value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses the cost ($49/year), the free-tier carve-out, the human-in-the-loop payment handoff, and the concrete return shape (liveUrl vs checkout link + pendingUrl). It also quantifies idempotency — same inputs or same idempotencyKey within 24 hours returns the first result — which the annotation alone does not convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences: purpose and return value first, then the payment branching, then the idempotency guarantee. No filler, and the most decision-relevant information (does this cost money / is it safe to retry) is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values and does so explicitly for both branches (liveUrl vs checkout link plus pendingUrl). For a 9-parameter, open-world creation tool, an agent has enough to call it correctly and interpret the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains the semantic consequence of resourceType (free vs paid branch) and the 24-hour retry window attached to idempotencyKey. The remaining fields (compliance toggles, companySlug, email) are left entirely to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a precise verb and resource — 'Generate and host a privacy policy ... and return its stable HTTPS URL' — which tells an agent exactly what the call produces. It does not name or differentiate itself from siblings such as check_privacy_policy_url or list_resource_types (the latter only appears in the schema), so the sibling-distinction bar for a 5 is not met.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly frames the two outcomes an agent should expect: immediate liveUrl for free resource types and Agent API key holders, versus a Stripe Checkout link plus pendingUrl for paid types requiring human payment. There are no explicit exclusions or pointers to alternative tools for already-existing policies (e.g. check_privacy_policy_url), which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Privacy Policy URL tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?